La Implementación del Estatuto de Roma en la Región Andina: los Casos de Bolivia, Colombia y Perú (The Implementation of the Rome Statute in the Andean Region: A Case-Study on Bolivia, Colombia and Peru)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spanish Abstract: El Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) se ha constituido en un instrumento fundamental para el desarrollo del Derecho Internacional a fin de lograr una efectiva proteccion de los derechos humanos y del derecho internacional humanitario. Sin embargo, es necesario destacar que la obligacion de investigar y sancionar los crimenes de genocidio, de lesa humanidad y de guerra recae primordialmente en los Estados, por lo que la CPI solo asumira competencia en la medida en que no existan voluntad politica o los medios necesarios para administrar justicia.Para cumplir con esta obligacion, es necesario que se adopten reformas tendientes a incorporar los postulados del tratado en los ordenamientos juridicos internos. El presente libro formula propuestas en el ambito constitucional, penal y procesal de Bolivia, Colombia y Peru, en aras de adecuar sus sistemas a este nuevo mecanismo de justicia internacional.Es asi que se analizan los principios generales del Estatuto de Roma, los crimenes de competencia de la CPI y los mecanismos de cooperacion judicial frente a la legislacion existente, proponiendo alternativas que contribuyan a la lucha contra la impunidad y la incorporacion de los postulados del Derecho Penal Internacional.English Abstract: The book analyzes the challenges regarding the implementation of International Criminal Law within the national legislation of Bolivia, Colombia and Peru. Although published in 2005, the main findings remain valid as these countries are yet to fully implement the Rome Statute.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it